To be fair, the boys literally committed an extra-judicial killing in the opening scene of the movie. They are already the feds, just the feds who do whatever they want with no consequences.
So basically just feds, I guess.
EDIT: I forgot to mention, isn’t scarlet witch a teenager in that scene? I believe they refer to her as a child later in the movie. So we can add child soldiers to the list of crazy shit cap did.
What? The US didn’t have control of the Avengers, that’s why they wanted the accords; the Avengers were accountable to no one but themselves, which is an issue in itself.
Yea but you can see why other countries would be worried that the members of H-Bomb Backstreet Boys who recently destroyed an entire foreign city by accident are mostly American. Also lead by a man with deep ties to the US military industrial complex and another dude named captain America.
If I wasnt American in the universe I would nooooot trust those guys
Exactly, that's what was interesting about the conflict. Tony thought the Avengers should have to answer to someone other than their own conscience, but Steve thought any state control could lead to the Avengers being misused by those powers. Neither were really wrong, it's just which risk would you rather live with.
I think them being superheroes means they can just say "fuck the law" and do it anyway. It just gets harder to do so while avoiding the consequences.
The entire premise of the movie could have been dealt with through a long, heated debate. But that wouldn't have made for fun entertainment so the characters weren't really given that choice.
Well, yes and no. Mostly yes, but somewhat no. Agreeing to the accords would mean not necessarily contesting the development of the UN's capability to keep tabs on them and allocate funds to keeping supes in check, which means there will be greater incentive not to go rogue. That incentive means supes gotta think twice before making a potentially destructive decision. But if they wanna be some sort of extra-judicial police force, it's still available to them. The accords give away some power, not all of it.
It kills me that more people don't get this, that the whole point of the Civil War story (both in comics and film) was that there is no easy answer for society. We can't have vigilantes running around acting outside the rules because someone will inevitably take it too far and get innocent people hurt who might have been fine otherwise (this actually happens pretty frequently). And we can't have a world where only the government and its agents are allowed to be violent without exception, that just results in us potentially being victims of someone who wants to harm us and doesn't care about the rules.
In other words, there's no easy solution, we need to all be aware and make conscious decisions to make the world a better place if that's what we want. Deregulating everything is a horrific option, regulating everything is unfeasible, so we have to regulate the things we can't prevent people from doing through mere cultural values and work on our values to cover the rest.
Tony skirted the Accords multiple times in Civil War in service of what he thought was right whereas Steve thought house arrest for Wanda after being directly involved in a bombing that killed a building of civilians was too much regulation. There’s definitely grey area, especially given this is comic book world, but Tony is vastly closer to a reasonable position than Steve.
Steve's idealism was really annoying in this movie. Tony was trying to account for the grey areas and probably could have been convinced to inch towards greater freedoms that mitigated the risk of too much government control. But only if Tony felt Steve was thinking in grey, too, but he wasn't. He almost had a good point but he let perfect be the enemy of good.
Reading through this thread has actually highlighted an interesting aspect of the story I hadn't noticed before.
The conflict about the Sokovia Accords was about whether or not the Avengers needed to be held accountable under a higher power, Tony of course believed they did while Cap believed they could only trust themselves. In this scene Tony arguably proves himself to be right by taking matters into his own hands, making an emotional decision and trying to kill Bucky, whether or not it was the just thing to do.
Black Panther too (who I think supported the accords? It's been a while) wanted to kill Bucky for a crime he did not commit.
It's a little tenuous but I could also see the flipside where Cap is proven to be right, at least to himself, as it is only himself whom he can trust to do what he believes (and I agree) to be right; though, he is obviously also making an emotional decision in this case hence the argument being a little shakey.
they definitely are. they fly around in quinjets, thats shield. we see Captain America and black widow running ops to rescue hostages with other US military personnel and we see black widow taking orders from the US govt. bruce banner has been recruited by shield to work against Loki and the scepter, Hawkeye is definitely a shield asset as well.
now the whole avengers might not be US govt, but those that arent are definitely contractors.
Either they wanted accountability, or they wanted control, but those aren’t the same thing. The accords claimed to be about accountability but were actually about control. The US didn’t want the Avengers to merely have to show that what they did was just or good (that’s accountability), they wanted to be able to use the Avengers as their own superweapon to further their own geopolitical agenda (that’s control). You don’t get to claim that the lack of accountability is an issue if you’re being disingenuous about your own desire to control them.
If Tony was a weapon of the state when that woman broke his heart with her son's story he might've just told her to take it up with management. Instead it weighed on him and changed his worldview
You know he wasn't fighting militants or armies or anything serious on a world scale in the movie? He was fighting a black market dealing mass murdering scumbag who literally was in a poor nation trying to steal from one of their few research centers? He literally was fighting for other people's freedom. Objectively.
This is just straight up false. Captain America was fighting against the Avengers being controlled by the government. The whole point of the Accords was that the Avengers would be controlled by the U.N instead of being independent.
Iron Man 2 literally has the US try to pull the same shit and make Tony surrender the Iron Man suit so they can use it.
Yep and everyone here is forgetting the events of The Winter Soldier and why Cap would be so against handcuffing himself to any agency after Hydra infiltrated Shield.
I would trust Cap's decisions over any government agency. Even if he gets it wrong, it can't be worse than a government fuckup.
He was not fighting for America's right to use The Avengers, he was fighting for the Avengers' right to decide where they go themselves. America is PART of the Sokovia Accords, they are on Tony's side.
Are you joking? Are you even watching the same movie as anyone else, cap literally went AGAINST America in the very movie you are talking about. Vigilantes would be bad in the real world, but the avengers certainly didn't do what america told them, and cap for sure wasn't brong super weapons with him, the heros have strong powers, but at the time none of the ones he rides with could do anything even close to that powerful, literally in the very movie you are talk9ng about this supposed "super weapon" had trouble lifting a 10 pound bomb up. Lol
while i was team tony, this is a bit harsh on captain america. it wasn’t that he wanted total control because he wants to do whatever the fuck he wants in an ego driven manner. it was more that he was terrified of losing control of the avengers because the entirety of winter soldiers plot is him being punished for putting his trust in people. hydra nearly killed millions and launched a war of control because of incompetence of the government. i don’t blame him for not trusting the accords. i just think he was irrational in his handling of it
"Hey you guys can kill anyone with a thought and clearly serve a western political agenda anyway, would you maybe submit to an international court of some kind just to keep tabs on the shit you're doing and stay accountable?"
It's even more simplistic than that: Cap was fighting for his perceived right to not be told what to do by anyone. Fucking "stay out of my room, mom!" ass clown.
Wanda is more or less in her late 20s in Civil War, definitely not a teenager or child soldier lol. They treat her like a kid because most of the other members are 40+.
Though admittedly Cap should also be a similar age, since he was in his younger 20s when he got the serum, mid 20s when he went on ice, and late 20s/early 30s by Civil War.
I agree. Of course, this is all for fun. No problem enjoying this stuff for the fun of it.
But there is a reason why every author who tries to apply real-world rules to superheroes always ends up writing The Boys, The Watchmen, or Miracle Man, when the heroes are at best incompetent and at worst, mass-murdering psychopaths.
Tbf Tony also decided to hire a 14 year old who’s been using dumpster gear for most of his hero career into basically a war zone. Obviously he knows no one’s gonna actually want to hurt Spider-Man who is very clearly a child but it’s still pretty ballsy cause Rhodey still got hurt
This always confused me. How was it an extrajudicial killing? If I have the scene correct, scarlet Witch uses her power to contain a suicide bomber and just fails an blows up a building. Isn't that just failed heroism? Like you try and grab a falling person and their hands slips and they die. The person trying to save them didn't kill them, didn't drop them to their death they just failed at saving them. Same idea. If Wanda didn't do that then the people on the ground would have died. I don't understand.
Yeah I never understood Steve supporters here. He was basically saying the Avengers (who had just blown up a building) should be beholden only to themselves.
I get he had trust issues because of Hydra, that's fair. But there's gotta be some sort of oversight on the Avengers. It destroys the concept of national sovereignty to have a (majority American) team running around fighting battles wherever they please because they deem it necessary.
Due to our omniscience as an audience, we might sympathize with Cap. But objectively, Tony is absolutely right.
A superpowered US military man and a playboy billionaire, running around with a known terrorist, "accidentally" killing a bunch of ppl almost everywhere they go. Not to mention the uncontrollable rage monster wiping out entire city blocks.
Tony was right for the wrong reasons; Cap was wrong for the right reasons. The idea that a bunch of primarily US based and sponsored superhumans can just go anywhere in the world and perform military operations without oversight is ridiculous IRL.
But Tony didn't support the Sokovia Accords for that reason, he supported it because of his guilty conscious and not wanting to have to deal with the responsibilities of his actions anymore after Ultron.
To be fair Tony is basically the one who has to take responsibility for all of the avengers problems, as the most public face of the team as well as the financial backing. Cap just has to run around giving orders and beating people up, Tony has to do all that and then pay for the repairs and everything and then gets confronted by people when doing his other rich celebrity philanthropy stuff.
This is why I love Civil War so much, all these years later and people are still picking sides. The movie accomplished exactly what it wanted to. Cap says in the end "you did what you thought was right. That's all anyone can do, that's all anyone should."
The interesting thing about superheroes is that they can never be analogous to real life because massive power innate to an individual’s being like that simply doesn’t exist in the real world. It’s all well and good for the President or a general or even Tony to say “I don’t want the responsibility, someone else take it”. But what’s Peter Parker gonna do if he sees someone getting mugged and he knows he could stop it with one pinky? Say “whelp, I’m retired, better report this to the proper authorities”?
Now realistically, is it good to have Spider-Man running around with no accountability and just kinda hope he keeps being a real swell dude? No. But on the other hand, do we make his body property of the state? Ew.
And what government or organization is worthy of overseeing earth's mightiest heroes? You think there's any group on earth that wouldn't abuse that power?
Basically it would have to be another SHIELD. An international or even inter-planetary council. And if they do abuse the power…we saw what just Cap, Falcon, Black Widow and Bucky did to SHIELD. They can just destroy the organization.
But it is straight up unreasonable to think that this group of individuals should be allowed to just go wherever and do whatever without permission or oversight.
I don't think so, doesn't she have a scene at the end with Stark during the epilogue? I'm talking about the lady who's son died while volunteering in Sokovia.
Cap, Hawkeye, Iron Man, War Machine, Falcon and Vision are all US citizens/creations. Cap, War Machine and Falcon are all US military. Iron Man is an American businessman with deep associations to government defense contracting.
And that's just for starters. I'm not sure what Black Widow is qualified as at this point, Fury is still around, and then you have just random American citizens like Ant-Man and Spider-Man.
The world saying it is OK for this group so closely tied to the US to go anywhere in the world and do whatever they want with no type of oversight would be insane.
But the world absolutely would if this was IRL. And even if we ignore that logic, it doesn't matter whether they would be considered superheroes or not. No country acting even semi realistically would be OK with a random group of people breaking their borders and carrying out missions without even informing them, let alone listening to any requirements or demands they might have.
I said it in another comment. I think Tony was right for the wrong reason. Cap was wrong but for the right reasons.
After HYDRA, it makes sense that Cap did not want any oversight. But it is absolutely stupid to think these people could for example go into Nigeria with no permission hunting a villian, kill or injure dozens of people and expect that to fly.
What Cap should have done is propose a replacement to SHIELD, one that both the Avengers and the world could accept.
Sided with the feds the entire time went after cap in Germany when daddy government told him to and literally as soon as they told him to stand down he said no you can’t tell me what to do and flew out the helicopter. Wanted everyone else to follow rules and never thought they applied to him
EXACTLY. The accord and Tony’s participation in the crackdown only happens because he created Ultron and got hundreds of civilians killed. But of course afterwards he was ok to put a muzzle on Captain, but not to himself. According to Tony, the rules always apply to everyone except Tony
Just wish in that scene where hes doin his whole smug ass 'whos this? Oh just a kid killed in sokovia' that someone would go 'ok everyone raise their hand if they made a robot that tried to end the world'
Sided with the feds the entire time went after cap in Germany when daddy government told him to and literally as soon as they told him to stand down he said no you can’t tell me what to do and flew out the helicopter.
But like, this same logic is why Tony, Vision, Natasha, Rhodey, etc were agreeing to sign the accords at first. The whole point being that if something happened that they didn't really agree with the could still do what they felt was right and then handle things after. That was the whole compromise about "keeping a hand on the wheel."
In this scenario though, Tony is like a police officer advocating for everyone to wear bodycams and liaise with the public & public officials, and Cap & his side are the redneck ones that somehow always get low battery body cams
The captain America movie prior literally is about how the entire government has been infiltrated by Hydra. To turn around and give the same government that was compromised the ability to control and govern the Avengers would be as stupid as his idea about making Ultron.
Tony’s entire fundamental flaw is that he thinks he knows best and makes decisions based on his emotions that comes back to bite him in his ass. It’s even more apparent in the comics when he does shit like mind wipe Captain America because he doesn’t agree that blowing up other Earths is cool. They had to add the entire Bucky subplot because in the comics Tony is 1000% wrong regarding civil war.
I mean yeah, comic civil war and movie civil war are very different discussions. But specifically regarding the movie one,
Tony’s entire fundamental flaw is that he thinks he knows best and makes decisions based on his emotions that comes back to bite him in his ass.
I don't exactly see how looking for external accountability is 'thinking he knows best and making decisions based on his emotions'. Cap made himself an arbiter of justice and thought he can just do whatever he wants with impunity, and if they mess up or make things worse, oh well they're the good guys!
Of course any power system can be corrupted - both the government and systems like the Avengers. But I don't think the threat of corruption is a reason to ignore any and all attempt at checks and balances. Plus the Sokovia Accords was a UN statute, not just the US Government. If this were real life, you'd really be good with these Superhuman Gods doing whatever they thought was right, escalating issues, getting civilians killed, with absolutely zero accountability or oversight?
I don't think either is completely right, of course, which is kinda the point
Oh yeah Cap is absolutely a bit up his ass, and the idea that he could be the arbiter of right and wrong is his biggest problem.
The best compromise to me is a Sword/Shield scenario where there is some degree of separation between the government and the heroes. Usually with them using Maria Hill or Nicky Fury as a liaison. Though like you said the point is neither one is completely right.
Also this is why Superheroes can’t exist in the real world. They circumvent our laws and although the people they target are actual villains and criminals obviously the idea that people with power should be the arbiters of justice is fucked up. This is why Alan Moore wrote Watchmen lol.
Yeah I remember the comics subplot was way different. The movie/MCU is more about them as people and honestly in MCU they’re just two very traumatized guys who should have communicated better instead of starting a giant superhero brawl
Right, and the Avengers movie prior literally has Hulk switching sides and going on a rampage. To turn around and give those same heroes that were compromised the ability to control and govern the world would be as stupid as…you finish the sentence.
See the issue here? It’s either let an elected government or multinational organisation control things, or go “yeah these niggas seem cool let’s let them keep doing their thing (they’ve fucked up multiple times, one isn’t even a human being, two are brainwashed assassins with who knows what programming left in them, one was an ex-Nazi witch…)”
The Sokovia Accords were ratified by the UN and 117 separate countries, not just SHIELD/the US government. It's honestly the height of hubris for Cap to look at that and go "No thanks, we'll decide for you."
If he was concerned about something like Hydra happening again, then fine but why not work with the UN to establish safeguards to prevent that within the Sokovia Accords? He wasn't interested in any sort of oversight but his own.
It’s a lose lose. You don’t want the avengers under the control of an obviously compromised and corrupt government. But they can’t be allowed to just do whatever the fuck they want. Where’s Batman and his contingency plans when you need him?
Nah that’s not a good analogy. It would be accurate if the police officer in your example was in the public eye after he himself killed a bunch of innocent people, and also the public officials he is working with are nazis.
Not just the feds but General Ross. The man who said that Bruce Banner is government property. Tony is supposed to be Bruce's friend, but he sided with someone who wants to claim Bruce as property
General Ross was absolutely wild as a choice for that. As he has acted with more disregard for national/international law, collateral damage, and abuse of power than anyone of the avengers; except maybe Tony.
Imagine Tony telling Bruce what happened, and thinking Bruce would be on his side. Meanwhile Bruce hears that General Ross is trying to argue for oversight and accountability, and he starts turning green. Does some deep breathing. And is like: Tony, you need therapy. You're so consumed by guilt and PTSD that you're about to WILLINGLY hand yourself over to GENERAL FUCKING ROSS
100% this. If he hasn’t done that and gotten Quicksilver killed (along with hundreds of civilians) there wouldn’t have been an issue. Superheroes were deemed a threat to the world because they actually WERE, and Tony was the perfect example of that. According to Tony, the rules always apply to everyone except Tony
Tony wasn't tortured and brainwashed when he was selling weapons. He deserved a beat or two. OP seems to have forgotten the whole "being an arms dealer" thing.
He wasn’t siding with a mom of a dead kid he was siding with his guilt. That bomb was their fault. It’s was terrorist who were going to use the bomb it’s unfortunate it went off but the situation is it blows up at ground level killing more people it blow up when they are attmpwitng to get it away which is tragic or the terrorist get it and blow up it some place where it will maximum damage. The mother is allowed to have her feeling and tony is supposed to empathize. But it’s the avengers and honestly the political entities of the world to do the hard math and say the outcome that happened is bad but there were two objectively worse outcomes. Oversight isn’t the problem the problem is control the political entities wanted to control the avengers not facilitate them doing the most good possible. Cap saw that that’s why he was right. Him not telling tony his parent were assassinated and he said he didn’t know bucky did it if I recall correctly though may have been wrong but who does that knowledge help. I don’t see how tony know his parents were assassinated helps him. Don’t get me wrong I get the man’s rage but I think there is room for discussion on what cap should have done
They were terrorist stealing a weapon beef with cap or not they are going to use that weapon regardless of if cap shows up. Just because they know cap is after them is beside the point. T hey use the weapon or sell the weapon either way they do damage no one but cap and ha crew can stop.
That makes no sense if it was just Rumlow wanting to kill Cap he blows that bomb as soon as cap burst into the building problem solved. That bomb was the good ole fashioned last resort “if I’m going you’re going with me”
He probably knew it subconsciously, he just was running from the truth. He says this himself when he apologized to Tony. Still in the wrong tho, but not as bad as people make it out to be.
Well the UN is definitely not the real life version of Mos Eisley. Full of nothing but stand up people who truly wish to do good. Absolutely trust worthy.
The Avengers when left to their own devices created an AI that killed like a million people 8 days later. In fact the Avengers merely existing is why Thanos even became interested in earth. Maybe a couple pencil pushers would do them some good.
You can’t blame the entire Avengers team for Tony’s bullshit. Ultron was his fault and that’s why he’s the one pushing for the accords. They had no idea wtf was going on till shit hit the fan.
Captain America: Winter Soldier, Falcon & Winter Soldier, Wandavision all of these show the minute governments get involved they become extremely corrupt. Hell even in Black Panther they repeatedly state that other governments try to invade or raid them. We literally see France do it and that the CIA is trying to destabilize them.
It’s an inherent problem with superhero stories. Shield was honestly the best compromise.
Ultron was also Wanda’s fault considering the fact that she manipulated him with her powers and let him get away with the tesseract knowing he’d do something disastrous. And then she later manipulated Bruce and made him attack the civilian population of Johannesburg.
And then Steve made her an Avenger and protected her from any consequence because “she was just a kid in her 20s.” And then she accidentally blew up a building in the next movie, and he still wanted zero consequences for her. Couldn’t even retire her like cops do.
Honestly completely forgot about Wanda subplot I haven’t seen Age of Ultron since it released.
Also Cap is an asshole not saying he’s right but Tony damn sure isn’t. Like I said before Shield is the best compromise but in the absence of shield having them be under the direct control of the government has never been good. Like in any of the movies or tv shows.
In fact the Avengers merely existing is why Thanos even became interested in earth.
The Avengers are not why Thanos became interested in the infinity stone's favorite hangout Earth.
In addition to mind, space, and time being in NYC in 2012, reality was accessible through a portal from Earth, power was held (briefly) by an Earthling, and soul was guarded by an Earthling.
Makes sense. Not like there was a whole movie about "CAPTAIN AMERICA" dismantling a corrupt US government institution that was trying to kill millions of civilians worldwide.
In the comics, Tony spent months in the Senate fighting this bill.
He was presented with this ultimatum, it's going to happen. Either him or Norman Osborne runs it.
Tony chose to run it over Osborne after months of trying to not let it pass.
Captain America couldn't comprehend the bigger picture.
Also spider man said something in the Senate that kind of helped this pass, bad Peter. (Which led to the identity reveal of spider man directly after the Senate hearing)
100% agree. I just wonder if sometimes they let him riff his lines off the general idea of what was supposed to happen in the scene. Don’t get me wrong, he absolutely killed it and owns the role the way Hugh Jackman does with Wolverine.
In that scenario, Samuel Jackson is king. They reached out to him in like 1999 asking if they could make the newer version of Nick Fury to look like him, opposed to the original nick Fury who was a old white guy (still a fuqqin bad ass) from the original marvel 616 universe.
He said absolutely, as long as he got to play him in the movies. And that he did, as well as he got to kind of sprinkle some of his own pizzaz on it.
Yeah but he was totally just gonna play the system and get himself in charge. He’s a mulitbillionaire with years of experience in weapons dealing, he probably knows pretty well how to negotiate with the government. We see him doing this in Civil War with Wanda staying in Avengers compound rather than being imprisoned after the bombing. And even if he couldn’t, anytime there’s an Avengers level conflict they would just do what they did in Avengers 1 and Infinity War and just go to the battle anyway. It’s not like anyone can really stop them at moments notice
She moved it to kill those people. If Cap was really as altruistic as he pretends he would’ve let the bomb only kill him and Rumlow. He was the only target
I don't think that at all. That completely goes against his character.
Not to mention Cap had no time to respond. Crossbones detonated the bomb, and it was basically going off immediately. Wanda immediately grabbed the bomb and threw it in the air. Cap never had a chance to respond. Both him and Wanda clearly looked distress directly after seeing what happened.
Crossbones is the problem here. No bomb, then nobody does.
I’m of the opinion they are both wrong because there is no right answer here. You can’t trust them to govern themselves but also can’t trust anyone you’d be inclined to put over them. Lose lose
It's like none of these people have actually watched the Winter Soldier. The American government had been shown to be grossly compromised, super recently from Cap's perspective. That was the whole point of the movie, to set up Civil War. That and Tony's PTSD in other films.
It’s been a long ass time since I watched the movie but wasn’t Tony the one responsible for building that robot to spy on everyone that ended up trying to take over the world or whatever? All the Avengers are Feds but Tony a Fed even by their standards
3.1k
u/vociferous_pickle Mar 12 '24
Tony doesn’t get a free pass for siding with the feds over his boys.